Thanks again to everyone contributing here — even when the perspectives are critical, I really do appreciate the engagement and the thought behind the replies.
Let me clarify a few things. The primary goal of this CT scan is to look at frame quality and construction. That’s always going to be a core concern with unbranded or replica frames — especially when there are known risks around manufacturing inconsistencies, and reported issues like the fork failures. For frames like these, I think it’s fair that people want to see what’s going on under the surface.
That said, I know this project isn’t going to answer everything. I don’t have the time or budget to do a full suite of lab tests — ride quality, deflection data, long-term fatigue testing, etc. If I did, I’d absolutely aim to make something more comprehensive. But within the scope of what I can do, I hope this still adds value.
@Serge – I now understand your earlier point more clearly, and you’re right: the side-by-side ride test is a valid and valuable approach. I’ve been riding both frames, but not in a direct comparison, so I’ll try to set up a proper back-to-back session this week if time allows. The idea of masking the bikes and having others ride them blind is brilliant — maybe tricky to organise, but I do know someone who’s about to receive one of these frames, which could open the door to doing this. Definitely something I’d like to try.
@Sakizashi – Thanks for laying out the different testing angles clearly. I hear you: if the point is construction and safety, the scan makes sense. If it’s frame properties, deflection or stiffness testing would be better. And for real-world impact, the blind ride test adds a whole different layer. All three methods are useful in their own ways, and ideally they’d complement each other. On your ethical concern — you’re probably right. Realistically, this frame likely exists because someone used or leaked original IP. That is uncomfortable to acknowledge, and I don’t take it lightly. I’m still processing that side of things, but I do appreciate you raising it so clearly.
@Sebastian – You make a valid point about inconsistency. That may actually be one of the more useful things to emerge from the scan — if it shows how construction varies, even between similar-looking frames. I agree we won’t get sweeping answers from a sample size of two. But for those who already own these frames — or are on the fence — even a limited view inside might offer more than the anecdotal red flag lists. It’s not a silver bullet, but hopefully it contributes something concrete to the bigger picture.
Again, I’m not trying to make grand claims here — just trying to move the conversation forward in a practical and constructive way. If there are better alternatives within reach, I’m genuinely open to hearing them.
